zlacker

[parent] [thread] 5 comments
1. bsimps+(OP)[view] [source] 2025-01-14 01:10:57
If you insist on casually calling the guy you voted against a felon, I don't think you're as impartial as you claim.
replies(2): >>Animal+a2 >>mbs159+3J
2. Animal+a2[view] [source] 2025-01-14 01:26:12
>>bsimps+(OP)
He is in fact a convicted felon. That is objectively, impartially true.

It not be impartial to mention it, though. PG almost certainly didn't write this essay out of cowardice because a felon got elected.

He may have written it out of cowardice because a bully got elected, though...

replies(1): >>bsimps+R6
◧◩
3. bsimps+R6[view] [source] [discussion] 2025-01-14 02:00:57
>>Animal+a2
I erred on the side of pithy to try to avoid derailing. I've never voted for him and there's a lot that I dislike about him; however…

There's a very credible argument that the DA overcharged the case so people who dislike him can try to ostracize him as a felon and make his supporters look unhinged. If your shorthand for "the less woke candidate won" is "the felon won," you don't get to credibly claim "I'm impartial" in a conversation about wokeness.

replies(2): >>cycrut+6g >>notaco+4i
◧◩◪
4. cycrut+6g[view] [source] [discussion] 2025-01-14 03:17:15
>>bsimps+R6
So still a convicted felon then?
◧◩◪
5. notaco+4i[view] [source] [discussion] 2025-01-14 03:33:23
>>bsimps+R6
It's not a credible argument. The "overcharges" led to a guilty verdict and sentence. That could not have happened if they were truly as you portray. Believing that your less-informed opinion overrules those of everyone actually in the courtroom is pure hubris.
6. mbs159+3J[view] [source] 2025-01-14 08:13:23
>>bsimps+(OP)
It is a fact that he is a convicted felon.
[go to top]